Table 1. Activities in the Amudarya case study and participative methods applied.

Issue Extreme events Wetland ecosystem services Social dimension Social dimension Community-based water and wetland management Soil quality management Participative evaluation of project findings
Activity Assessment of institutional barriers for managing droughts Identification of indicators for monitoring environmental flows Community-based research on social aspects of water management Community-based research-validation Community-based research-Gaming sessions Participative design of monitoring system Participative evaluation of project findings
Method applied Nominal group technique Cognitive mapping and group model building Public communication meetings and focus groups Strategic choice approach Role-playing game (companion modeling) Cognitive mapping Cognitive mapping and group model building
Objective Priority setting for policies dealing with extreme events, knowledge exchange among participants; knowledge elicitation
Integration of knowledge of specialists from different management levels and identification of feasible measures to address complex issue of droughts
Assessment of environmental flow requirements of deltaic ecosystems;

Identification and selection of ecological and social indicators for monitoring of wetland vulnerability

Capturing different viewpoints on water management and livelihood strategies from among the local water users and managers in a community

Capturing diversity based on the nature of livelihoods; landholding status; types of crops produced; location of the lakes or farms along the irrigation canals; gender status of the households; migration status, and ethnicity

Validation of findings of community-based research about social aspects of water management

Aiding decisions to be made in particular planning and development situations

Providing an interactive forum between people with different backgrounds and skills

Building of a shared understanding of factors that shape vulnerability and responses options to low water events

Improving understanding of behaviors of resource users and management rules

Testing the use of role-playing games in the Uzbek context

Making participants aware of impacts of their actions on the system

Identification of indicators for community –based monitoring of soil salinity and wetland ecosystems
Enhancement of the usability of local knowledge to support environmental monitoring for adaptive management
Feedback on research findings
Discussing joint understanding of the current regime
Integration of the knowledge of specialists from different management levels and identification of feasible measures for selected issues
Elicitation of stakeholders’ knowledge on status quo and potential measures
Organization of activity
(Method/ Activity at each step and number of people involved)
1. Identifying water shortage problems and potential solutions
(individually)
2. “Round robin”-presentation of results of 1. (collectively)
3. Clarification questions from other participants (collectively)
4. Voting on most important issues
(individually)

Final discussion
(collectively)
1. Cognitive mapping
(individually)
2. Group-model building
(collectively)
3. Assessment of feasible changes and measures
(collectively)
4. Presentation of models
(collectively)

Final discussion
(collectively)
1. Public communi-cation meetings
(collectively)
2. Focus groups
(collectively)
3. Dialogue with co-researchers
(individually)

Validation workshops (see next column)
(collectively)
1. Choosing focus areas for problem solving
(collectively)
2. Developing options for what can be done realistically, particularly in view of uncertainties
(collectively)
3. Identifying actions for solving the problems
(collectively)

Identifying actors that can deliver
(collectively)
1. Explaining objectives and rules of the game
(collectively)
2. Roles distribution
(collectively)
3. Test round
(individually/collectively)
4. Operational debriefing
(collectively)
5. Game execution
(individually/collectively)
6. Discussion and debriefing
(collectively)

Debriefing of moderators
(individually)
1. Semi-structured interviews with local community members
(individually)
2. Group session with local community
(collectively)Semi-structured interviews with scientists (experts)
(individually)

Group discussion with scientists
(collectively)
1. Cognitive mapping
(individually)
2. Group-model building
(collectively)
3. Assessment of feasible changes and measures
(collectively)
4. Presentation of models
(collectively)

Final discussion
(collectively)